The Dome of the Rock: An Analysis of Its Origins

Kubah Sakhrah: Satu Analisis Asal-usulnya

Spahic Omer

Abstract
This paper challenges an old belief that the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem was
built between 65/684 and 72/691 by the Umayyad caliph ‘Abd al-Malik Ibn Marwān.
The paper is divided into two parts. The first part briefly examines the significance of
the Rock (Øakhrah). Therein we have shown that the Rock has no special religious sig-
nificance whatsoever. The second part tries to answer who exactly built the Dome of the
Rock and when. The paper concludes that the likely truth is that the caliph ‘Abd al-
Malik ibn Marwān was able to commence building the edifice only after crushing the
insurgence of ‘Abd Allah ibn al-Zubayr in 73/692. Such were the socio-political condi-
tions in the Muslim state during the insurgency that the caliph’s actions could not trans-
cend the planning and basic preparatory stages, at most. Whether the caliph ‘Abd al-
Malik ibn Marwān was capable of completing the structure during his lifetime or not,
remained a debatable point as well. The task of building one of the first and at the same
time greatest masterpieces in Islamic architecture might have been completed by his son
and successor, al-WalÊd ibn ‘Abd al-Malik. What follows is shedding more light on
these aspects of the topic.

Keywords: The Dome of the Rock, al-AqÎÉ Mosque, the Caliph ‘Abd al-
Malik ibn Marwān, the Caliph al-WalÊd ibn ‘Abd al-Malik.

Abstrak
Kajian ini mencabar kepercayaan lama bahawa Kubah Sakhrah di Yerusalem
dibina antara 65/684 dan 72/691 oleh khalifah Umayyah 'Abd al-Malik b. Marwan.
Kajian ini dibahagikan kepada dua bahagian. Bahagian pertama menelitikan
kepentingan Sakhrah. Dimana kami menunjukkan bahawa Sakhrah tidak mempunyai


Associate Professor in the Department of Fundamental and Interdisciplinary Studies,
International Islamic University Malaysia.

International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) Journal of Islam in Asia, Vol.12, No. 1

June 2015
201 Spahic Omer

signifikan agama sekalipun. Bahagian kedua cuba menjawab dengan tepat siapa yang
membina Kubah Sakhrah dan bila ia dibina. Kajian ini menyimpulkan bahawa
kemungkinan besar khalifah 'Abd al-Malik b. Marwan mampu bermula membina hanya
selepas mengalahkan pemberontak daripada 'Abdullah b. al-Zubayr pada 73/692.
Begitulah keadaan sosio-politik di negeri Islam semasa pemberontakan sehingga
tindakan khalifah tidak dapat mengatasi perancangan dan peringkat persediaan asas.
Sama ada Khalifah 'Abd al-Malik b. Marwan mampu menyiapkan struktur semasa hayat
beliau atau tidak, ia masih diperdebatkan. Tugas membina salah satu seni bina Islam
yang pertama dan yang terunggul mungkin telah disiapkan oleh anak dan penggantinya,
al-Walid b. 'Abd al-Malik. Berikutnya mencurahkan lebih banyak keterangan pada
aspek topik ini.

Kata Kunci: Kubah Sakhrah, Masjid al-Aqsa, khalifah ‘Abd al-Malik b.

Marwan, khalifah al-Walid b. ‘Abd al-Malik.

Introduction
One of the topics shrouded in several mysteries and misunderstand-
ings is the topic of building the Dome of the Rock and what its real pur-
pose and functions were. This is because the Mosque of al-AqÎÉ wherein
the Dome of the Rock is placed enjoys some remarkable religious signif-
icance, inferior only to al-Masjid al-×arām in Makkah and the Prophet’s
Mosque in MadÊnah. Hence, many people, especially some members of
the Muslim political leadership and those who blindly supported them,
vied for control over it and for leaving notable legacies associated with it.
This paper identifies the issue of who exactly and when built the Dome
of the Rock, as one of the contentious points and tries not necessarily to
solve it, but to offer a new perspective for studying it.

The significance of the Rock (Øakhrah)

Much has been written and said about the Rock (Øakhrah) within
the al-Aqsā Mosque proper (al-×aram al-SharÊf or Noble Sanctuary).1
Yet, scholars throughout history considerably differed - and still do - in
their verdict as to what the real status and function of the Rock is. By and

1
By the al-’AqÎā Mosque we mean the whole area of the Noble Sanctuary, i.e. al-
Haram al-SharÊf, accounting for the second mosque on earth instituted 40 years after
the Ka’bah. The present-day al-’AqÎā Mosque covers only a section of the Sanctuary.
 The Dome of the Rock: An Analysis of Its Origins 202

large, this phenomenon can be attributed partly to the fact that some as-
pects of the Rock phenomenon remained shrouded in several and hitherto
unresolved mysteries, and partly to the contrasting religious, political,
cultural and social inclinations of those who safeguarded, administered,
studied, wrote or narrated about the al-AqÎÉ Mosque. The truth is, how-
ever, that the Rock bears no special importance whatsoever. It is signifi-
cant inasmuch as it constitutes a part of the al-AqÎÉ Mosque, the second
mosque on earth set up forty years after the construction of the Ka‘bah.2
In no way can the Rock be held more important and, as such, more
revered than the other parts of the al-AqÎÉ Mosque. Everything that the
Holy Qur’ān and Prophet MuÍammad (s.a.w.) have said about the al-
AqÎÉ Mosque applied as much to the Rock as to the rest of the sections
of the Mosque.3
Extraordinary reverence attached to the Rock by many people is
rooted in little truth. In the main, such reverence is based on copious
groundless legends and myths that are either work of some Muslims who
have been contriving and propagating them in different ages, under dif-
ferent circumstances and for different purposes, or are no more than the
recreation or even retelling of the same as found in the Jewish tradition.
The Rock, which the domed edifice apparently shelters, is the
highest point in the al-×aram al-SharÊf, i.e. in the al-AqÎÉ Mosque. It is
located approximately in the center. It is a bluish rock. It stands about
one and a half meters above the floor – or about the height of an average
man - at its highest part and is approximately eighteen by thirteen meters
in area. Beneath it is a cave about four and a half meters square, in the
roof of which there is a hole about a meter in diameter.4

2
Al-Bukhāri, ØaÍÊÍ al-Bukhāri, Kitāb AÍādÊth al-’Anbiyā’, Bāb. (DÉr Ibn KathÊr , al-
YamÉmah - BeirËt - 1407 - 1987, Ed. 3, TaÍqÊq: MuÎÏafÉ DÊb al-BughÉ) ×adÊth No.
3366
3
See: Muslim, ØaÍÊÍ Muslim, Kitāb al-’Ômān, ×adÊth No. 234. Al-‘Asqalāni, Ibn ×ajar,
FatÍ al-BÉrÊ bi SharÍ ØaÍÊÍ al-Bukhāri, (Cairo: Maktabah al-Kulliyyah al-Azhariyyah,
1978), vol. 15 p. 56. Al-‘Ayni, Badru al-DÊn AbË MuÍammad, ‘Umdah al-QārÊ Sharh
ØaÍÊÍ al-Bukhāri, (Cairo: Sharikah MuÎtafÉ al-BÉbÊ al-×alabÊ, 1972), vol. 14 p. 10.
4
Duncan, Alistair, The Noble Sanctuary, (London: Longman Group Limited, 1972), p.
28.
203 Spahic Omer

The Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem built, as commonly perceived,

between 65/684 and 72/691 - about these dates we shall raise in a while
some serious concerns - is the earliest existing monument of Islamic ar-
chitecture. Its significance lies in its geographical, historical and religious
contexts, as well as in its status as the first genuine representation of the
then rising phenomenon of Islamic art. The structure’s form, details and
its choice of constitutive elements manifested that the evolution of the
identity of Islamic art has finally after a steady progression approached
its final stage. The new art was expanding very rapidly and on a broad
front, bringing everyday more and more different peoples, cultures and
civilizations to its fold. As a result, such subsequent works of art as the
Great Mosque of Damascus, started in 88/706 and finished in 96/715, the
Great Mosque of Cordova, founded in 169/785, and that of Ibn TËlËn in
Cairo, finished in 266/879 – in addition to a number of other structures
executed at a smaller scale during the same period - no longer represent-
ed phases in the evolution, but were, in their quality as art, unsurpassable
masterpieces.5 They articulated a new matured art language hitherto un-
known, which has been generated by the Islamic view of reality, of man,
of life, of the world, of space, and of God, and at the hands of those who
in their deeds, actions and thoughts epitomized such a worldview.
The Dome of the Rock is located on an artificial platform, ap-
proximately in the center of the al-×aram al-SharÊf, i.e. in the centre of
the al-AqÎÉ Mosque. According to Creswell, it is “an annular building
and consists in its ultimate analysis of a wooden dome 20.44 m. in diam-
eter, set on a high drum, pierced with sixteen windows and resting on
four piers and twelve columns, placed in a circle just large enough to sur-
round the Rock, and so arranged that three columns alternate with each
pier. A central cylinder is thus formed, of height about equal to its diame-
ter. This circle of supports is placed in the centre of a large octagon aver-
aging about 20.59 m. a side, formed by eight walls 9.50 in height (ex-
cluding the parapet, which measures 2.60 m.). Externally there are seven
bays in each side, but those next the corners – that is to say the bay at

5
Burckhardt, Titus, Art of Islam, (London: World of Islam Festival Publishing
Company Ltd., 1976), p. 9.
 The Dome of the Rock: An Analysis of Its Origins 204

each end of each side, or sixteen in all – are treated as blind panels. The
remainder is each pierced in their upper part by a window.”6

A replica of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, Palestine. The edi-

fice lies virtually in the centre of the al-×aram al-SharÊf, or Noble Sanc-
tuary, of the original al-Masjid al-AqÎÉ. Courtesy of the Islamic Civiliza-
tion Park (Taman Tamadun Islam) in Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia.

Who built the Dome of the Rock and when?

It is generally accepted that the Dome of the Rock was built by the
Umayyad caliph ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwān. The epic undertaking start-
ed somewhere in 65/684 and was completed seven years later in 72/691.7
However, this view stands no chance to hold out against a thorough and
earnest scientific inquiry into the facts that the same is anchored in.

6
Creswell, K.A.C., A Short Account of Early Muslim Architecture, (Cairo: The
American University in Cairo Press, 1989), p. 20.
7
Blair, Sheila S., “What is the Date of the Dome of the Rock?”, inside: Bayt al-Maqdis,
‘Abd al-Malik’s Jerusalem, edited by Julian Raby and Jeremy Johns, (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1992), p. 63.
205 Spahic Omer

So confounding, at least, and misleading, at most, are the existing

accounts about the subject at hand that MuÍammad Shurrāb, the author
of the Book 'Bayt al-Maqdis wa al-Masjid al-AqÎÉ’, even inferred that
not the caliph ‘Abd al-Malik but rather his son al-WalÊd, who succeeded
his father as a caliph, was responsible for constructing the edifice. 8 Some
even ended up speculating that preparation of the site and even some
construction work took place during the reign of Mu‘āwiyah, the first
Umayyad caliph who died in 60/679.9
However, the likely truth about the subject is as follows. Such were
the circumstances surrounding the planning and construction of the
Dome of the Rock that both caliphs firstly ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwān
and then his son al-WalÊd ibn ‘Abd al-Malik had to put in their contribu-
tions - which nevertheless varied in nature and magnitude - so that the
unparalleled architectural masterpiece could be realized. ‘Abd al-Malik
ibn Marwān is likely to have kicked off the mammoth project of erecting
the structure somewhere in 73/692 – some planning and preparation ac-
tivities may have taken place much earlier, though - when he became the
de facto ruler of the entire Muslim state, but he may have fell short of
completing it during his lifetime. Not only building the Dome of the
Rock but also constructing what is known today as the al-AqÎÉ Mosque -
habitually ascribed to al-WalÊd ibn ‘Abd al-Malik - may have constituted,
in part, the caliph ‘Abd al-Malik’s development scheme. Or the original
completion of the Dome of the Rock might have taken place after all dur-
ing the reign of the caliph ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwān, however, the ca-
liph al-WalÊd ibn ‘Abd al-Malik had to make several significant additions
and even alterations, especially in terms of the building’s decoration, or-
namentation and utility, so that the edifice could go well with the incred-
ible architectural plans and ambitions of his own never matched before
and hardly ever matched afterward. The caliph al-WalÊd ibn ‘Abd al-
Malik is reputed to have been the first in Islamic civilization who intro-

8
Shurrāb, MuÍammad, Bayt al-Maqdis wa al-Masjid al-’AqÎÉ, (Damascus: Dār al-
Qalam, 1994), p. 322.
9
Blair, Sheila S., “What is the Date of the Dome of the Rock?”, inside: Bayt al-Maqdis,
‘Abd al-Malik’s Jerusalem, p. 62
 The Dome of the Rock: An Analysis of Its Origins 206

duced mosque ornamentation.10 A segment of his awesome enterprises

was the construction of what is called today the al-AqÎÉ Mosque too, on
the site where the Caliph ‘Umar’s Mosque had formerly stood. Hence,
that there might have existed an effort on the caliph al-WalÊd’s part to-
ward making the two buildings - which in fact share the same identity in
that they both lie within the al-×aram al-SharÊf, the boundaries of the
original al-AqÎÉ Mosque - appear consistent with each other in terms of
form and adornment sounds very much plausible and likely.
Our assertion rests on the following three arguments:
First: Inconsistencies of Muslim historical sources
Too few sources reveal the date of when the construction of the
Dome of the Rock either started or was completed. And when they do,
their accounts are by and large contradictory and even misleading.11 One
of the best examples of how delicate is the issue at hand is Ibn KathÊr and
his work ‘al-Bidāyah wa al-Nihāyah’. At one place, as one of the events
that occurred in 66/685, Ibn KathÊr speaks about how the Caliph ‘Abd al-
Malik built the Dome of the Rock as part of his plans aimed at the devel-
opment of Jerusalem (Bayt al-Maqdis).12 He went so far as to portray not
only the building in its final form but also the immediate as well as sub-
sequent impact it had made on the lives of the people. Thereafter, how-
ever, Ibn KathÊr made no reference to the Dome of the Rock until he
spoke briefly about the biography of the Caliph al-WalÊd ibn ‘Abd al-
Malik, under the events of the year in which he died, i.e. 96/714, citing
his death as one of the major events of the year.13 While dwelling on the
achievements of the caliph al-Walid, Ibn KathÊr mentioned - quite sur-
prisingly - the Dome of the Rock, rather than the al-AqÎÉ Mosque, as one
of them. Having said that, as if Ibn KathÊr wanted to relate that both Ca-

10
Al-‘AsqalanÊ, Ibn ×ajar, FatÍ al-BārÊ bi SharÍ ØaÍÊÍ al-BukhārÊ, (Cairo: Maktabah
al-Kulliyyah al-Azhariyyah, 1978), vol. 3, p. 108. Al-×amawÊ, YaqËt, Mu’jam al-
Buldān, (Beirut: Dār al-Øādir, 1984), vol. 4, p. 265.
11
Blair, Sheila S., “What is the Date of the Dome of the Rock?”, inside: Bayt al-Maqdis,
‘Abd al-Malik’s Jerusalem, p. 63.
12
Ibn KathÊr, Abu al-Fidā’, Al-Bidāyah wa al-Nihāyah, (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-
‘Ilmiyyah, 1985), vol. 8 p. 283.
13
Ibid., vol. 8 p. 283.
207 Spahic Omer

liphs in their own ways played a part in making the edifice emerge as it
was in his days and as it is today. As if he, furthermore, meant by the
Dome of the Rock both the al-AqÎÉ Mosque and the Dome which shel-
tered the Rock.
Besides, while a number of the most prominent Muslim historians,
such as al-Ùabari, Ibn ‘Asākir, al-BalādhurÊ, al-DÊnawarÊ, al-Mas‘ËdÊ and
al-MaqdisÊ remained completely silent on the subject of building either
the Dome of the Rock or the al-AqÎÉ Mosque, a few others, such as Ibn
al-AthÊr14 and Ibn KhaldËn15, merely observed that the Caliph al-WalÊd
ibn ‘Abd al-Malik had built the al-AqÎÉ Mosque. What did they exactly
mean by their declaration? Either the Mosque normally attributed to al-
WalÊd, or the Dome of the Rock, or both, is as good as impossible to as-
certain, as they left no clues about it.
Second: The Significance of an Inscription on the Edifice
That erecting the Dome of the Rock the caliph ‘Abd al-Malik ibn
Marwān accomplished in 72/691 almost all people shore up by the in-
scription which runs around the outer face of the structure’s octagonal
arcade. The inscription now reads: “The servant of God, al-Ma’mËn,
commander of the believers, built this dome, may God accept it from him
and be pleased with him, in the year 72 (that is 691). Amen.”16 It is be-
lieved that originally the inscription contained the name of the Caliph
‘Abd al-Malik, but the Abbasid Caliph al-Ma’mËn had his own name in-
serted in place of the latter, probably in 216/831, leaving the date as it
initially stood.17
However, more than a few scholars questioned the authenticity of
the said inscription. Sheila Blair concluded that the year 72/691 men-
tioned in the inscription actually refers to the time of the Dome of the

14
Ibn al-’AthÊr, MuÍammad Ibn MuÍammad, Al-Kāmil fÊ al-TārÊkh, (Beirut: Dār al-
Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, 1987), vol. 4 p. 292.
15
Ibn KhaldËn, ‘Abd al-RaÍmān Ibn MuÍammad, TārÊkh Ibn KhaldËn, (Beirut: Dār al-
Kitāb al-Lubnāni, 1957), vol. 3 p. 148.
16
Blair, Sheila S., “What is the Date of the Dome of the Rock?”, inside: Bayt al-Maqdis,
‘Abd al-Malik’s Jerusalem, p. 60.
17
Creswell, K.A.C., A Short Account of Early Muslim Architecture, p. 36.
 The Dome of the Rock: An Analysis of Its Origins 208

Rock’s inception rather than to its completion. Her line of reasoning rests
on quite a few sound premises the two of which are relevant here: firstly,
too few Umayyad inscriptions survive to permit the establishment of any
hard-and-fast rules about their meaning during this formative period.
Nonetheless, even though sometimes it is impossible to tell whether the
date refers to conception or completion, yet most of the few that do sur-
vive from this period rather give the date that the patron ordered the con-
struction of a building. Secondly, the mosaic decoration on the interior of
the Dome of the Rock must have been executed in the years following
72/691 by craftsmen who might have worked on the Church of the Nativ-
ity in Bethlehem in the previous decade.18 Whereas some other scholars,
like MuÍammad Shurrāb19, considers the inscription as a sheer forgery,
produced maybe during one of the building’s subsequent restorations, as
its style of writing does not correspond with the style of the age when the
building was erected. As it has been shown, furthermore, that the practice
of the caliph al-WalÊd ibn ‘Abd al-Malik20 was to write nothing on his
masterpieces so as to document who, when and how constructed them.
Furthermore, reflecting on the peculiarity of the content of the in-
scription enhances the postulation that something is genuinely wrong
with it. Certainly, it is absolutely irrational and impractical that after the
caliph ‘Abd al-Malik had built the Dome of the Rock documenting it on
an inscription, the Abbasid Caliph al-Ma’mËn, about one hundred and
fifty years later, simply attempted, defying in the process religious pre-
cepts, history and the public opinion, to strip ‘Abd al-Malik of the credit
and appropriate the same for himself. As unreasonable and unworkable -
if not even more – is the contention that while doing that which he is al-
leged to have done, the Caliph al-Ma’mËn had his own name inserted in
place of his Umayyad counterpart’s but simply ‘forgot’ to change the
date on the inscription.21 If true that he simply forgot to change the date,
18
Blair Sheila S., “What is the Date of the Dome of the Rock?”, in: Bayt al-Maqdis,
‘Abd al-Malik’s Jerusalem, p. 63, 85.
19
Shurrāb MuÍammad, Bayt al-Maqdis wa al-Masjid al-’AqÎÉ, p. 368.
20
The author believes that it was the caliph al-WalÊd rather than his father the caliph
‘Abd al-Malik who built the Dome of the Rock.
21
Duncan, Alistair, The Noble Sanctuary, p. 38.
209 Spahic Omer

why did nobody notify him of the slip-up; what kind of strategy did al-
Ma’mËn have in mind and how serious and meticulous was he in the first
place; what was the role of his numerous advisers; and last but not least,
where was the voice of the public and thousands of pilgrims who used to
frequent the site reveling in its splendor and magnificence? In any event,
it goes without saying that so great, shrewd and intelligent was the Ca-
liph al-Ma’mËn that what some people imputed to him in relation to the
Dome of the Rock is simply unacceptable.
In actual fact, the aforementioned inscription has nothing to do
with either ‘Abd al-Malik or al-Ma’mËn. It has been created at a period
of time by an individual or a group who must have been really ignorant,
misinformed, or possessed some clandestine agendas against someone
and was able to manipulate certain rulers of the day, as well as some
quarters of the commoners, for the fulfillment of his/its goals. This asser-
tion appears quite probable given that the historian al-WaqidÊ, for in-
stance, with no hesitation charges only ‘one of the ignorant people’ for
stripping off the name of ‘Abd al-Malik and writing the name of al-
Ma’mËn instead.22 In addition, al-WaqidÊ’s account utterly vindicates the
Caliph al-Ma’mËn of tampering with the content of the inscription, as al-
WaqidÊ was al-Ma’mËn’s contemporary and was even one of his leading
judges in Baghdad. He reportedly died in 207/822, roughly nine years
before the alleged act of al-Ma’mËn took place.
Ibn KathÊr reported that the ‘Abbasid Caliph Abu Ja’far al-ManÎËr
in 140/757 restored the al-AqÎÉ Mosque including the Dome of the Rock,
after he had found much of it in ruins as a result of an earthquake. Hav-
ing finished the job, the caliph wrote on the Dome on the side facing the
qiblah gateway: “Commander of the believers, ‘Abd al-Malik, ordered
its23 construction after it has been renovated in 62?/681.”24 If this some-
what confusing account proves anything than it proves that as early as

22
Elad, Amikam, “Why did ‘Abd al-Malik Build the Dome of the Rock? A Re-
examination of the Muslim Sources”, inside: Bayt al-Maqdis, ‘Abd al-Malik’s
Jerusalem, p. 38.
23
Apparently, the al-’AqÎÉ Mosque, as well as the Dome of the Rock, are implied here.
24
Ibn KathÊr, AbË al-Fidā’, Al-Bidāyah wa al-Nihāyah, vol. 8 p. 284.
 The Dome of the Rock: An Analysis of Its Origins 210

during the earliest days of the Abbasid rule the original inscription on the
Dome of the Rock authenticating its maker and the date of its com-
mencement or completion – provided it really ever existed – began to be
exposed to the factors that were able to render it either lost or replaced on
purpose. Quite often afterward, much restoration and improvement work
has been done to the structure, the first occasion coming to pass as quick-
ly as after the caliph AbË JaÑfar al-ManÎËr had gone and was succeeded
by his son al-MahdÊ when yet another earthquake struck the region. As
far as the inscription is concerned, however, it should have been repeat-
edly retained, but for sure every time in accordance with the builders’
and patrons’ version of the historical episodes closely associated with the
building of the Dome of the Rock - as well as the al-AqÎÉ Mosque - and
in accordance with the overall conditions that surrounded it. After all, the
existing confusion in modern scholarship pertaining to the exact history
of the Dome of the Rock is anything but a doing of modern scholars, it is
part of the befuddled legacy bequeathed by the classical Muslim scholar-
ship.
And to end with, it is quite an astonishment why the celebrated
traveler NÉÎir Khusraw in the mid-11th century failed to refer to the con-
troversial inscription while giving quite a comprehensive description of
the Dome of the Rock, whereas a number of less relevant and apparently
smaller in size inscriptions scattered all over the complex could not es-
cape his attention.25 On no account could he overlook the thing; he must
have seen it but maybe its content did not appeal to him. Still, he would
have had no reason to omit mentioning it completely. Thus, one of the
theories that could be advanced as a likely answer to the puzzle is that
there was no then any inscription whatsoever to the effect of the build-
ing’s history or its originator. Who scrapped the original inscription – if
it was ever there – and why, and when the one we see today was pro-
duced and by whom, would be just too much to ask bearing in mind all
the complications in connection with the subject matter.

25
Khusraw, NaÎir, Book of Travels, translated from Persian by W. M. Thackston, Jr.,
(Albany: Bibliotheca Persica, 1986), p. 23-34.
211 Spahic Omer

Third: A Political Turmoil and the Caliph ‘Abd al-Malik’s En-

thronement
It was rather unfeasible for the Caliph ‘Abd al-Malik to start build-
ing the Dome of the Rock in 65/684, completing it some seven years later
in 72/691.26 It ought to be borne in mind that when ‘Abd al-Malik suc-
ceeded his father MarwÉn in 65/684, the Umayyads controlled only Syr-
ia, with Palestine, and Egypt. Even that has not been always out of harm's
way. On the eve of ‘Abd al-Malik’s succession, control over Egypt was
for the interim lost, as was over Palestine, and even Syria has been occa-
sionally threatened.27 The Muslim world was controlled virtually by
‘Abd Allah ibn al-Zubayr, a rebel against the Umayyad establishment
since 64/683 with headquarters in Makkah. The menace of ‘Abd Allah
ibn al-Zubayr did not end until 73/692 when he was killed.
So precarious the situation during this trying period was that the
Byzantines, buoyed by the consuming discord among the Muslims, arose
in 70/689 and gathered an army intending to assail the Muslims in Syria.
Knowing how weak he was, ‘Abd al-Malik, fearing for himself and oth-
ers, made peace with the Byzantine emperor, on somewhat humiliating
terms that every Friday he would deliver a thousand dinars to the emper-
or.28 This was not all. ‘Abd al-Malik and his shaky authority was con-
stantly threatened by the undying upheavals of the Kharijites, as well as
by the increasing and intensifying activities of the militant wings of the
Shi’ites. As there were some instances of internal disputes among the
members of the Umayyad family. One of such disputes – dubbed by al-
ÙabarÊ29 as an old feud - led to the revolt of ‘Amr ibn Sa’Êd ibn al-‘Ós,
‘Abd al-Malik’s cousin, either in 69/688 or in 70/689. On leaving tempo-
rarily Damascus, most probably for Iraq to wrest it from ‘Abd Allah ibn
al-Zubayr’s brother and governor, MuÎ’ab ibn al-Zubayr, ‘Abd al-Malik
made ‘Amr ibn Sa’Êd his deputy over the city. However, the latter re-

26
Shurrāb, MuÍammad, Bayt al-Maqdis wa al-Masjid al-’AqÎÉ, p. 367.
27
Ibn KathÊr, AbË al-Fidā’, Al-Bidāyah wa al-Nihāyah, vol. 8 p. 243.
28
Al-ÙabarÊ, Ibn JarÊr, The History, translated and annotated by Michael Fishbein,
(Albany: State University of New York Press, 1990), vol. 21 p. 169.
29
Ibid., vol. 21 p. 165.
 The Dome of the Rock: An Analysis of Its Origins 212

belled, taking control of Damascus, the symbol and pivot of the Umay-
yad existence as a ruling dynasty, and its treasures. At this, ‘Abd al-
Malik had to return as swiftly as he could to Damascus and put down the
insurrection, which he after sometime did, eventually killing the rebel.30
What could be deduced from the above is that so massive was the
assignment of planning and building the Dome of the Rock that no more
than some planning and preparation moves could be executed between
65/684 and 73/692. The construction of that which was not critical by
any means, and which could only dissipate the government’s inadequate
resources, was definitely placed somewhere at the bottom of the hierar-
chy of the Caliph ‘Abd al-Malik’s pressing priorities. Additionally, in
financial terms ‘Abd al-Malik was an exceptionally prudent and tightfist-
ed person, so much so that he was nicknamed ‘the Stone Oozing’ (Rashu
al-Íajar).31 ‘Abd al-Malik is reported to have exhausted seven years’
revenue from Egypt on building the Dome of the Rock alone, 32 instruct-
ing the men in charge to spend money lavishly.33 This is maybe correct,
but to embark on doing something like that under the circumstances de-
scribed above was totally unfeasible and imprudent a thing to do. ‘Abd
al-Malik must have sought out to build the Dome of the Rock at some
other time, under more favorable conditions. Besides, the latter probabil-
ity appeared to be more consistent with ‘Abd al-Malik’s character, men-
tality and his ways of doing things rather than the former one, i.e. build-
ing the Dome of the Rock in extremely difficult and trying times.
If ‘Abd al-Malik’s building of the Dome of the Rock was seen as
an attempt towards consolidating his grip on power, then such an act is
expected to have started to materialize only when securing power was
already achieved in 73/692, or at least when the same was in sight in
72/691 in the wake of the fall of Iraq. We are told that ‘Abd al-Malik had
30
Ibid., vol. 21 p. 154-167.
31
Al-BalādhurÊ, AÍmad Ibn YaÍyā, Ansāb al-’Ashrāf, (Beirut: Dār al-Fikr, 1996), vol. 7
p. 194.
32
Duncan, Alistair, The Noble Sanctuary, p. 32.
33
Elad, Amikam, “Why did ‘Abd al-Malik Build the Dome of the Rock? A Re-
examination of the Muslim Sourses”, inside: Bayt al-Maqdis, ‘Abd al-Malik’s
Jerusalem, p. 35.
213 Spahic Omer

written to all provincial governors as regards his intention to build the

Dome of the Rock seeking their approval as well as support in terms of
finances and workforce without which the project at the end of the day
wouldn’t have materialized. But ‘Abd al-Malik was able to do this only
after the entire Muslim state came under his administration in 73/692;
heretofore, he de facto controlled only Syria, with Jordan and Palestine,
and Egypt.
It stands to reason, therefore, that the caliph ‘Abd al-Malik, was ac-
tually incapable of starting off the task of building the Dome of the Rock
until the year 73/692 when he became quite confident about his prowess
and position, as well as when the overall climate became conducive to
laying a foundation for some notable long-term objectives. Not only to
building activities did this modus operandi apply but also to lots of other
projects and schemes with no less civilizational bearing than the Dome of
the Rock. For example, turning from the defensive to the offensive, ‘Abd
al-Malik around the same time managed to turn the tables on his external
and internal foes by magnifying and intensifying warfare against them.
Also, he upgraded the roads around Damascus and Jerusalem.34 He fur-
thermore improved the effectiveness and competency of the state appa-
ratus by changing the records (dawāwÊn) from Persian35 and Latin36 to
Arabic, as well as by rendering the public accounts for the first time in
Arab style. From then on, in Syria there existed many a mint in which
Muslim coins were minted.37

34
Blair, Sheila S., “What is the Date of the Dome of the Rock?”, inside: Bayt al-Maqdis,
‘Abd al-Malik’s Jerusalem, p. 67.
35
Ibn ÙabÉtabā, MuÍammad Ibn ‘Ali, Al-FakhrÊ, translated by C.E.J. Whitting,
(London: Darf Publishers Limited, 1990), p. 118.
36
Ibn ‘Abd Rabbihi, Ahmad Ibn MuÍammad, Al-‘Iqdu al-FarÊd, (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub
al-‘Ilmiyyah, 1983), vol. 5 p. 148.
37
Blair, Sheila S., “What is the Date of the Dome of the Rock?”, inside: Bayt al-Maqdis,
‘Abd al-Malik’s Jerusalem, p. 70.
 The Dome of the Rock: An Analysis of Its Origins 214

Conclusion
The Rock (Øakhrah), which the domed structure in the center of the
al-AqÎÉ Mosque proper (Noble Sanctuary) shelters, has no special reli-
gious significance whatsoever. The conventional view that the Dome of
the Rock was built by the Umayyad Caliph ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwān
from 65/684 to 72/691 stands no chance to hold out against a thorough
and earnest scientific inquiry into the facts that the same is rooted in. The
likely truth, however, is that the caliph ‘Abd al-Malik could not embark
on building such an extraordinary and pricey edifice before crushing the
insurgence of ‘Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr in Hijāz in 73/692, even though
some planning and preparation activities may have taken place sometime
earlier. Such were the conditions hanging over the heretofore unequaled
architectural masterpiece in the Muslim world that the beleaguered Ca-
liph ‘Abd al-Malik appeared to be unable to accomplish it during his life-
time. Or the original completion of the Dome of the Rock might have
taken place after all during the reign of the Caliph ‘Abd al-Malik ibn
Marwān, however, the caliph al-WalÊd ibn ‘Abd al-Malik made several
significant additions and even alterations, so that the edifice could go
well with the incredible architectural plans and ambitions of his own.
Three issues have been discussed as proofs for our viewpoint, namely, 1)
inconsistencies of Muslim historical sources; 2) the significance of an
inscription on the edifice (the Dome of the Rock); and 3) A political tur-
moil and the Caliph ‘Abd al-Malik’s enthronement.